Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cleanhippie

(19,705 posts)
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 11:56 AM Apr 2013

Religious circumcision ritual leaves 2 Brooklyn infants with herpes

Two Brooklyn infants have contracted herpes through a controversial religious circumcision ritual in the past three months, according to the city’s Health Department.

The unidentified baby boys became sick after the centuries-old, ultra-Orthodox ritual associated with the bris known as metzizah b’peh.

Under the practice, the rabbi or mohel removes blood from the wound on the baby’s penis with his mouth — a practice city Health Department officials have slammed, saying it carries “inherent risks” for babies.

The Bloomberg administration has moved to require mohels who perform the ritual to provide parents with a document informing them of the health risks involved. The parents must then sign a consent form.

But several influential religious Jewish organizations have sued, arguing the policy violates the First Amendment.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/religious-circumcision-ritual-leaves-2-brooklyn-infants-herpes-article-1.1308205


Uhm, yeah, not being able to suck the blood from the genital mutilation wound you just inflicted on an infant is a violation of your rights.

There was a recent discussion about what constituted indoctrination or forcing beliefs onto children. If THIS isn't forcing another's religious beliefs onto a child...
79 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Religious circumcision ritual leaves 2 Brooklyn infants with herpes (Original Post) cleanhippie Apr 2013 OP
That is horrible and common here in Brooklyn. hrmjustin Apr 2013 #1
This practice should be all-out illegal. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #2
+1000 hrmjustin Apr 2013 #3
I agree Dorian Gray Apr 2013 #4
Lemme guess - something out of Leviticus. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #11
"If someone insists on circumcizing and infant.." Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #61
I don't consider circumcision Dorian Gray Apr 2013 #62
Correct. It is a practice that is much debated. Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #63
All circumcision on infants should be illegal. Apophis Apr 2013 #10
Let me guess, you're circumcised. rug Apr 2013 #15
Making public guesses about a DUers genitals is kind of weird, in my opinion. ZombieHorde Apr 2013 #53
It's aways good to know who's got a horse in the race. rug Apr 2013 #57
It sounds like the city is proceeding properly. I would guess this is not struggle4progress Apr 2013 #5
There seem to be about 375 cases of congenital syphilis a year in the US struggle4progress Apr 2013 #7
Herpes is forever. trotsky Apr 2013 #8
I still think the city is proceeding properly, but of course you're welcome to keep trying struggle4progress Apr 2013 #13
Herpes is indeed forever, and shame on those who are pooh-poohing the seriousness of this Heddi Apr 2013 #19
HEY DON'T FORGET THEY HAVE A LOWER RISK OF BLADDER INFECTIONS! trotsky Apr 2013 #32
"1. Circumcised infants have fewer bladder and kidney infections in the first year of life. struggle4progress Apr 2013 #6
The circumcision could have been performed without any risk of herpes transmission. trotsky Apr 2013 #9
SHOULD HAVE and COULD HAVE been. elleng Apr 2013 #52
But what are the risk to children that have HERPES? Heddi Apr 2013 #20
Go back and find some info that hasn't been discredited Lordquinton Apr 2013 #21
American Academy of Pediatrics Circumcision Policy Statement struggle4progress Apr 2013 #24
"health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks" Lordquinton Apr 2013 #65
Holy shit dude. This is crazy. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #23
American Academy of Pediatrics Circumcision Policy Statement struggle4progress Apr 2013 #25
The more you justify, the more disgusted I become. Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #27
I merely provided you with last year's policy statement from AAP struggle4progress Apr 2013 #28
You have sunk to a new low, s4p. trotsky Apr 2013 #33
But it's religion, Trots! Religion is good! Heddi Apr 2013 #45
The OP is not about circumcision, it is about an unsterile environment n/t arcane1 Apr 2013 #30
And as I have said "It sounds like the city is proceeding properly." However, there are multiple struggle4progress Apr 2013 #34
women married to circumcised men have a lower instance on cervical cancer... Sekhmets Daughter Apr 2013 #51
Shouldn't be hard to track down the guilty mohelim and charge them with reckless endangerment, dimbear Apr 2013 #12
It may not be kosher, but it's one heck of a band name arcane1 Apr 2013 #31
Gee, the last time you posted this kind of story you posted pictures. rug Apr 2013 #14
Let's see. Cutting off part of a child's genitals counts as physical child abuse... backscatter712 Apr 2013 #16
I see. You equate the removal of the prepuce with religious education. rug Apr 2013 #17
If there was an actual medical purpose for circumcision, I'd be less critical. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #18
American Academy of Pediatrics Circumcision Policy Statement struggle4progress Apr 2013 #26
I can dig up dozens of studies documenting the harmful effects of circumcision. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #35
It sounds to me like the city is proceeding properly. struggle4progress Apr 2013 #36
Not to me. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #42
Probably won't happen but I agree somebody needs some jail time for this. Leontius Apr 2013 #64
Told you so. He intentinally misled you to use "education" not "indoctrination" from his initial use cleanhippie Apr 2013 #38
You have been intentionally misled. It's religious INDOCTRINATION, not education. cleanhippie Apr 2013 #37
Very true. Education implies the material being taught is useful in the real world. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #41
Rabbis can slurp blood from baby penises but Rastafarians can't smoke pot? Phillip McCleod Apr 2013 #22
Court OKs religion defense against possession of drug. struggle4progress Apr 2013 #29
Haredim are unfortunately bringing this back Meshuga Apr 2013 #39
Though I do find it brutal and barbarian, it is not forcing any beliefs on anyone. Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #40
So it's worse to have a circumcision in a hospital setting Heddi Apr 2013 #43
Having a rough day are we Heddi? Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #54
Not a rough day at all, just a really rough time understanding Heddi Apr 2013 #66
Thanks for reminding me of what I wrote. And in BIG LETTERS too. How do you do that? Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #67
Post removed Post removed Apr 2013 #68
Oh dear, what a horrible thing to say. Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #71
I fit in pretty well here. Heddi Apr 2013 #72
Two wrongs don't make a right Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #73
Horrible and 100% true. Being hidden doesn't make it not right. I agree with what she said. 2ndAmForComputers Apr 2013 #74
Sorry, but what is true? And who is hiding and from what? Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #76
You're pretending you are, but you're not. 2ndAmForComputers Apr 2013 #78
I have no clue what you are talking about. Sorry. Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #79
It's forcing them on the baby. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #44
But but but! It's done for religion Heddi Apr 2013 #46
It indeed is absolutely disgusting and horrifying. Those mohels should be in prison. n/t backscatter712 Apr 2013 #47
BUT ITS A RITUAL Heddi Apr 2013 #49
It's the gift that keeps on giving! n/t backscatter712 Apr 2013 #50
You are 100% correct and I never suggested otherwise. Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #56
Also, I'm curious Heddi Apr 2013 #48
I don't know where you get the twisted idea that I support circumcision in any way. Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #58
the mohels are doing it for god AND money Heddi Apr 2013 #69
And why do the parents want their children to be mutilated by doctors, pray tell? Starboard Tack Apr 2013 #70
So messed up. Those babies now have incurable STDs. ZombieHorde Apr 2013 #55
Denouncing City’s Move to Regulate Circumcision struggle4progress Apr 2013 #59
Medical Associations Urge Against Injunction On Metzitzah Informed Consent struggle4progress Apr 2013 #60
This needs to be just flat out banned ButterflyBlood Apr 2013 #75
+1,000,000,000!!! n/t backscatter712 Apr 2013 #77
 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
1. That is horrible and common here in Brooklyn.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 11:59 AM
Apr 2013

There have been several stories on this here in Brooklyn.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
2. This practice should be all-out illegal.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 12:40 PM
Apr 2013

It's appalling that a religious figure puts his mouth on a baby's genitals at all.

Fucking disgusting.

Dorian Gray

(13,493 posts)
4. I agree
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 02:55 PM
Apr 2013

with this and I am curious what the reasoning behind this is? Especially with modern medicine. If someone insists on circumcizing and infant, there are more sanitary ways to handle the bleeding.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
61. "If someone insists on circumcizing and infant.."
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 08:27 PM
Apr 2013

What kind of person would insist on mutilating an infant? Are you saying the mutilation of babies is OK as long as it is sanitary?

Dorian Gray

(13,493 posts)
62. I don't consider circumcision
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 08:32 PM
Apr 2013

mutilation. It's a practice that is much debated. I would choose not to circumcise my infant child if I had a male child. But I know plenty of men who are circumcised and they are quite comfortable with the condition of their penis.

Having said that, I consider an adult sucking the injured penis to be unsanitary AND pedophiliac. Inexcusable in our society.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
63. Correct. It is a practice that is much debated.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 08:52 PM
Apr 2013

However, debate does not justify mutilating infants. We all know lots of men who were circumcised without their permission and don't have any issue with it. That is probably because they don't know any different. That's called ignorance. Those who profit from these barbaric practices will keep the "debate" alive, as long as there are those who will buy into it.
Of course this practice of sucking the blood is unsanitary and I defend it in no way. Though, I can see where at one time in the distant past, it may have been considered more sanitary than using local water sources, if available. Pedophiliac, though, really? I seriously doubt that this practice is in any way sexually gratifying, even for the most perverse among us.

Any routine circumcision is inexcusable IMO.

 

Apophis

(1,407 posts)
10. All circumcision on infants should be illegal.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 05:10 PM
Apr 2013

No parent should have the right to hack off part of an infant's penis.

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)
53. Making public guesses about a DUers genitals is kind of weird, in my opinion.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:45 PM
Apr 2013

Do you that poster's genitals adds or subtracts from the opinion?

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
5. It sounds like the city is proceeding properly. I would guess this is not
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 04:40 PM
Apr 2013

the major mode of herpes transmission to neonates: there are about 400 neonatal cases of herpes a year in the US, with about a quarter of them diagnosed immediately at birth

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005067.html
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/127/1/e1.full

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
8. Herpes is forever.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 05:04 PM
Apr 2013

It will affect these innocent boys the rest of their lives, perhaps even destroying loving relationships they may have had otherwise.

Be sure to try and find them later so you can trivialize what happened to them to their faces.

Words cannot express how disgusting I find your behavior. You should be ashamed.

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
13. I still think the city is proceeding properly, but of course you're welcome to keep trying
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 06:34 PM
Apr 2013

to change my mind

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
19. Herpes is indeed forever, and shame on those who are pooh-poohing the seriousness of this
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 08:00 PM
Apr 2013

These infants are now infants with genital herpes, who will grow up to be young men with genital herpes, who will grow up to be men with genital herpes. They will undoubtedly spread these genital herpes to most (if not all) partners that they have sexual relationships with. Those people will then become men or women with anal, vaginal, or oral herpes.

I wonder if any of the posters here have ever had herpes. Have they ever had an outbreak? Have they suffered the shame and embarassment of having to tell everyone that you may potentially become sexually active with that you have a highly contagious sexually transmitted disease that is **NOT** controlled via barrier methods? Have these Google Warrior posters had medical providers insinuate that they are "dirty" because they have genital herpes? Have any of these Google Warriors, who can find ten thousand links in a millisecond ever felt the same and stigma associated with having genital herpes?

Moreso, have any of them actually lived through an outbreak? Had to be on viral suppressing medication for the rest of their lives to inhibit outbreaks? Have they ever writhed uncomfortably from the burning, stinging, itching, weeping lesions that spread across your genital and anal region, even if you are on medication? Would rather shoot yourself in the head than itch those weeping, not-yet-crusted over scabs because itching just makes the not-yet-scabbed over time last longer?

Have they ever considered the long-term health concerns that go along with genital herpes? That rubbing your hand on your genitals then forgetting to wash (think: sleeping, have an itch, dont' realize you scratched your junk at 2am) and then rubbing your eyes, transferring the herpes to your eyes which can cause blindness (As an RN, I have seen MANY cases of occular herpes. Nasty nasty stuff). Or how about the increased risk later in life of herpes encephalitis, where the herpes virus attacks your brain causing early dementia and other mental changes.

Oh, but that's okay. It's JUST herpes. Given to infants, without their consent, and will affect them and anyone they chose to be in a relationship with for the rest of their lives.

And if they go on to have sexual contact with women, and the women get herpes, it will affect their ability to give birth via vaginal delivery because of the increased risk of the infant being born getting occular herpes from passing through the vaginal canal. So their wives and/or girlfriends, once they get herpes, are relegated to having c-sections for their children. ANd taking acyclovir/valcyclovir for the rest of their lives.

BUT IT'S OKAY TROTSKY. IT"S JUST HERPES AND PLUS DONT FORGET SYPHYLLIS !!!1!!

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
32. HEY DON'T FORGET THEY HAVE A LOWER RISK OF BLADDER INFECTIONS!
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 10:03 PM
Apr 2013

So they got that going for them! FUCKING BOOYAH!

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
6. "1. Circumcised infants have fewer bladder and kidney infections in the first year of life.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 04:42 PM
Apr 2013

2. Circumcised men have lower rates of sexually transmitted infections, including herpes, syphilis and HIV. This is particularly critical in Africa where such infections run rampant. In Canada, the benefit is less pronounced.
3. Circumcised men have lower rates of penile cancer. Cancer of the penis is admittedly quite rare, so the overall role of circumcision in cancer reduction is small."
Circumcision: 5 facts and 3 misconceptions to consider before you do it
Dr. Michael Dickinson
Special to The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Mar. 08 2013, 12:00 AM EST
Last updated Friday, Mar. 08 2013, 12:00 AM EST

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
9. The circumcision could have been performed without any risk of herpes transmission.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 05:06 PM
Apr 2013

So take your red herring elsewhere.

elleng

(130,865 posts)
52. SHOULD HAVE and COULD HAVE been.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:41 PM
Apr 2013

Get rid of contaminated mohels.

NO FIRST Amendment issue AT ALL!!!

Agree 100% abt red herring.

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
20. But what are the risk to children that have HERPES?
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 08:02 PM
Apr 2013

Oh, so they get fewer bladder infections, on average, but THEY HAVE HERPES
HERPES
HERPES
HERPES
HERPES
FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES BECAUSE A MOEHL HAD TO PUT HIS HERPES-LADEN MOUTH ON THEIR PENISES AND GIVE THESE BABIES HERPES. YOU CANNOT GET RID OF HERPES. EVER. EVER. CONDOMS DONT STOP THE SPREAD OF HERPES.

Go put that in your fucking google search box

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
24. American Academy of Pediatrics Circumcision Policy Statement
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 09:36 PM
Apr 2013
Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement ... Copyright © 2012 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/3/585

Lordquinton

(7,886 posts)
65. "health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks"
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 11:13 PM
Apr 2013

So, a negligible reduction in STI transmission is worth the risk of the child dieing? or being maimed for life? How about we encourage health programs and condom use, and other methods which have real effects on these issues, and not mutilating babies.

 

Phillip McCleod

(1,837 posts)
23. Holy shit dude. This is crazy.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 09:33 PM
Apr 2013

What you are saying and implying so obliquely has completely discredited ..

I am am beyond words right now. I am so mad.

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
25. American Academy of Pediatrics Circumcision Policy Statement
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 09:37 PM
Apr 2013
Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement ... Copyright © 2012 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/3/585

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
33. You have sunk to a new low, s4p.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 10:08 PM
Apr 2013

Congratulations. Justifying the totally unnecessary transmission of herpes to innocent infants. Is there no religious practice too foul and harmful for you to defend?

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
45. But it's religion, Trots! Religion is good!
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:27 PM
Apr 2013

These babies probably got Holy Herpes. THey should feel blessed. plus, they'll get fewer bladder infections, so it's all good

The pretzel-twisting logic by the usual crew here is staggering. I've seen some crazy things given the "a-ok" or "great post" seal of approval but finding ways to completely minimize these infants being given incurable, highly contagious viral infections that will affect them for their ENTIRE LIVES, and that will affect every. single. intimate. relationship they have, and that will affect every. single. person. they are intimate with...it's staggering. How these folks can sleep at night is beyond me. THESE ARE BABIES. but, who gives a shit? It's just herpes! Who gives a shit? It was done for religious reasons. Fuck off if you have a problem with it.

Sickening. absolutely sickening.

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
34. And as I have said "It sounds like the city is proceeding properly." However, there are multiple
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 10:12 PM
Apr 2013

anti-circumcision comments in the thread (such as "All circumcision on infants should be illegal" or "Cutting off part of a child's genitals counts as physical child abuse&quot , so it seems entirely appropriate to note in the thread that circumcision does appear to have some medical benefits

dimbear

(6,271 posts)
12. Shouldn't be hard to track down the guilty mohelim and charge them with reckless endangerment,
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 05:54 PM
Apr 2013

malpractice and mopery.

Herpetic mohelim. Not kosher at all.

 

rug

(82,333 posts)
14. Gee, the last time you posted this kind of story you posted pictures.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 06:42 PM
Apr 2013

I'm sure you see no difference between male circumcision at eight days and religious education.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
16. Let's see. Cutting off part of a child's genitals counts as physical child abuse...
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 06:53 PM
Apr 2013

Then, there's so much of the religious education, which itself constitutes child abuse.

Good News Clubs are one of the topics that came up for discussion during your absence. These people, IMHO, are literally abusing children, but teaching them that they're horrible people, threatening them with Hell, teaching them they must obey God and religious authorities at all times, even if they call for genocide (using the Biblical story of Israel and the Amelekites), all in public elementary schools.

Anyways, here's one of the threads where we were talking about these clubs...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121871865

And you might find this video interesting...



Child abuse is child abuse, be it physical or psychological.
 

rug

(82,333 posts)
17. I see. You equate the removal of the prepuce with religious education.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 07:07 PM
Apr 2013

And you not only equate them with child abuse but you double down and write "religious education . . . itself constitutes child abuse."

I note you did not say indoctrinate, or brainwash but you hold "religious education . . . itself constitutes child abuse."

And as an example you cite "The Good News Club" a sectarian program which is " the leading ministry of Child Evangelism Fellowship (CEF), which creates the curriculum, translates it for use around the world, and trains instructors to teach it".

How you go from a herpetic mohel to a condemnation of religious education across the board is entertaining to watch but it does not enhance the credibility of your opinions.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
18. If there was an actual medical purpose for circumcision, I'd be less critical.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 07:21 PM
Apr 2013

But most people don't get circumcised for medical reasons. They get their bodies cut up for religious reasons, as babies, before they can make the choice themselves.

And of course, the mohel in the OP makes it a thousand times worse by using his mouth on the wound, giving kids herpes. There's no justification for that, religious or not. That's fucking disgusting and should absolutely be banned.

But most people move on from being circumcised, assuming they're not given STDs by their mohel. I will say that some of the religious indoctrination is actually worse than the physical abuse of a circumcision.

As for religious "education", in the Good News Clubs in particular, what are these kids being taught? That they are evil, that they're unworthy, that they cannot get better, that they deserve death, that the only out is through absolute obedience, and that they must obey religious authorities even when they're ordered to commit murder. Can you think of a better way to inflict a mental disorder on a person?

Threatening children with Hell, and telling them they deserve death, as young as the age of five. That's child abuse. This shit has driven people to mental illness and suicide. The psychological scars from religious indoctrination last a lifetime.

Read the discussion thread on Good News Clubs in the link I posted. These clubs are pretty damned twisted.

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
26. American Academy of Pediatrics Circumcision Policy Statement
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 09:38 PM
Apr 2013
Male circumcision is a common procedure, generally performed during the newborn period in the United States. In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) formed a multidisciplinary task force of AAP members and other stakeholders to evaluate the recent evidence on male circumcision and update the Academy’s 1999 recommendations in this area. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it. Specific benefits identified included prevention of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has endorsed this statement ... Copyright © 2012 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/3/585

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
35. I can dig up dozens of studies documenting the harmful effects of circumcision.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 10:33 PM
Apr 2013

It's as easy as going to scholar.google.com.

But really, we can go back and forth on this. I see circumcision as a mixed bag. Sure it makes spreading of STDs harder, but it also impedes sexual sensation, and may have harmful psychological effects.

I can understand the medical reasons, even if I'm skeptical that the benefits outweigh the harms.

But surely, I doubt that you'd support a mahel sucking the blood from a baby's circumcision wound with his mouth. The only point at which I'd tolerate circumcision at all is when it's done by trained doctors in a sterile environment, with painkillers, using modern medical technology.

What these mahels are doing is fucking sick.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
42. Not to me.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:22 PM
Apr 2013

If the "procedure" consists of a mouth coming in contact with an open wound on a baby's genitals, resulting in the baby getting herpes, what the city's doing isn't nearly enough. Not even close.

I'll call it enough when the mahels involved are facing prison, and all involved are looking at charges for endangering the welfare of a child.

cleanhippie

(19,705 posts)
38. Told you so. He intentinally misled you to use "education" not "indoctrination" from his initial use
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 12:28 PM
Apr 2013

of "religious education" upthread. )It was actually directed at me, but I chose to ignore it as I saw what he was trying to do.

You are dealing with a dishonest broker.

cleanhippie

(19,705 posts)
37. You have been intentionally misled. It's religious INDOCTRINATION, not education.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 12:26 PM
Apr 2013

The one you responded to is seemingly trying to get you to say something you don't mean, probably to use it against you.

Religious INDOCTRINATION is the forcing of religious beliefs onto children, while religious EDUCATION is teaching children ABOUT different religions and the beliefs people hold.

Rug and I had a very long discussion the other day on this very subject, so his use of the term religious education in place of religious indoctrination seems intentional and dishonest. I recommend you proceed with extreme caution, if at all.

The Good News Club is INDOCTRINATION.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
41. Very true. Education implies the material being taught is useful in the real world.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:21 PM
Apr 2013

But this is indoctrination, which is intended to scare and control people, starting at their most vulnerable, when they're children.

This is brainwashing, not education.

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
29. Court OKs religion defense against possession of drug.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 09:46 PM
Apr 2013

Posted by Hon. Prophet Benton on May 21, 2012 at 1:29am
Byline: Associated Press
... Citing the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned three marijuana-possession
convictions in Montana because the judge had barred evidence of the defendants' religious views. The court, however, upheld the
convictions and prison sentences of seven defendants on drug trafficking and related charges ...
http://eabicbahamas.ning.com/profiles/blogs/rastafarians-pot-conviction-reversed-court-oks-religion-defense

Meshuga

(6,182 posts)
39. Haredim are unfortunately bringing this back
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 06:18 PM
Apr 2013

The practice was encouraged in the dark ages since it was believed that cleaning the area this way helped avoid infections.

However, this was soon proven wrong so Jewish authorities discouraged the practice.

The ultra orthodox had to bring it back regardless of the proven harmful consequences. This is sad.

The evidence shows that authorities need to intervene.

One can argue, using the haredim's own religion, that the mitzizah b'peh can be skipped. The mitzvah is fulfilled without it. But we are talking about reasoning with people who freak out when they see women's shoes or a headless female shaped mannequin on a store window.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
40. Though I do find it brutal and barbarian, it is not forcing any beliefs on anyone.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 06:56 PM
Apr 2013

It is a ritual, and IMO a sick ritual, practiced by adults for their own gratification and is in no way beneficial to the infant victims.
I wonder more about the educated medical professionals, in this country, who perform routine circumcisions on infants. In a sense, I find that to be more barbaric. I guess it's OK for them to pad their pockets by mutilating babies.

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
43. So it's worse to have a circumcision in a hospital setting
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:22 PM
Apr 2013

where the doctor does not put his herpes-infected mouth on the penis of the infant, giving the infant a herpetic infection of the genitals?

While it's not "forcing any beliefs on anyone," it's certainly forcing a lifetime infection of HERPES on these INFANTS.

I repeat, since it seems to be getting missed in the cacophony of "THIS IS RELIGION AND RELIGION IS GOOD NO MATTER WHAT!!" apologetic nonsense,

THESE INFANTS WERE GIVEN HERPES. GENITAL HERPES. THEY WERE GIVEN HERPES BY GROWN MEN WHO HAD HERPES INFECTIONS AND GAVE THE INFANTS HERPES BECAUSE THEY PUT THEIR HERPES-LADEN LIPS ON THE PENISES OF INFANTS IN A RITUALISTIC BLOOD-SUCKING EXERCISE.

THESE INFANTS WITH HERPES WILL GROW UP TO BE ADULTS WITH HERPES. HERPES TRANSMISSION IS NOT STOPPED OR DECREASED BY CONDOMS. IT IS TRANSMITTED BY SKIN-TO-SKIN. ORAL SEX CAN TRANSMIT HERPES. KISSING CAN TRANSMIT HERPES. MUTUAL MASTURBATION CAN TRANSMIT HERPES

THESE GROWN MEN INFECTED INFANTS WITH HERPES. THERE IS NO CURE FOR HERPES. THEY WILL HAVE HERPES FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES AND THEY WILL MOST LIKELY INFECT ANYONE THEY HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH. ANY WOMAN/WOMEN THAT ARE INFECTED WITH HERPES WILL MOST LIKELY HAVE TO GIVE BIRTH VIA C-SECTION BECAUSE OF THE INCREASED RISK OF TRANSMITTING GENITAL HERPES TO *THEIR* CHILDREN DURING CHILDBIRTH

Sounds a FUCK of a lot like imposing some beliefs on someone to me. Or, imposing their herpetic lesions to the penises to unconsenting infants who probably, when grown and given the option, really woudln't want to have to live with a lifetime of herpes outbreaks and taking anti-virals to decrease the outbreaks.

But hey, it's just religion, right? No harm!

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
54. Having a rough day are we Heddi?
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:49 PM
Apr 2013

You might want to read what I wrote again and try to find anything I said supporting the mutilation of babies, be it via religious ritual, or unethical medical practice. Let alone where I suggested hospital circumcisions were "WORSE" in some way. I said I wonder more, because I expect more ethical behavior from medical doctors, than I do from witch doctors.
You might also want to ponder how religious beliefs can be "forced" on a victim who is still an infant.

May I also suggest a nice cup of tea to help you relax.

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
66. Not a rough day at all, just a really rough time understanding
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 07:27 PM
Apr 2013

the lack of any posts by the usual gang of "DONT SAY NOTHING MEAN ABOUT RELIGION" folks and masters at google-fu who are completely whitewashing the notion that these infants (and not just these infants...there have been others) who have been given a lifetime of an infectious, non-curable disease.

And let's remind ourselves what you wrote in response to the original post. THese are your words:

"Though I do find it brutal and barbarian, it is not forcing any beliefs on anyone."
**it is forcing beliefs on someone, namely, the children who now have an incurable, highly transmitted viral infection**

"It is a ritual, and IMO a sick ritual, practiced by adults for their own gratification and is in no way beneficial to the infant victims. "
So sucking the blood from open wounds on a penis with a herpes-infected mouth and passing on genital herpes to unconsenting infants is a ritual?"

"I wonder more about the educated medical professionals, in this country, who perform routine circumcisions on infants. In a sense, I find that to be more barbaric. I guess it's OK for them to pad their pockets by mutilating babies."

Right there is where you suggested hospital circumcisions were worse. Here, I'll type it again so you can remember what you wrote:

[font size=36]"I wonder more about the educated medical professionals, in this country, who perform routine circumcisions on infants. In a sense, I find that to be more barbaric. I guess it's OK for them to pad their pockets by mutilating babies."[/font]

And I'll tell you how religious beliefs can be forced on an infant: By the use of ritualistic blood sucking from an open penile wound that therefore gives that infant a lifetime supply of incurable, highly contagious herpes. That's about as close to "forcing" something on someone as you can get. No matter what these infants go on to do in life, no matter what religious beliefs they hold or shun, they will always be infected with an incurable, highly contagious viral infection that was given to them during a religious ritual. Regardless of the usefulness or not of circumcision, the transmission of herpes via a religious person's herpes-infected mouth going onto the penis of an infant in a ritualistic blood-sucking...thing...is completely unnecessary and will affect those boys just as much as if they had tattoos put on their face. Moreso, because tattoos can be removed.

And please keep your hugs to yourself. I'd suggest a nice cup of something for you, but I don't want my post to get hidden.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
67. Thanks for reminding me of what I wrote. And in BIG LETTERS too. How do you do that?
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 08:18 PM
Apr 2013

How you translated it is mind boggling. If you think that infecting babies with herpes is forcing a belief on them, then you must live in some alternative reality.
Circumcision is a BARBARIC practice, period. Performing it under sterile conditions lessens the chance of infection, but does not diminish the fact that it is BARfuckingBARIC.
On a barbarism scale of 1-10, I'll give circumcision in a hospital a 9+, and a penis sucking, herpes spreading circumcision an 11+. That means BOTH are bad. The only difference is that one is performed by a guy who thinks he's obeying God, which is a pretty pathetic excuse, especially for those who don't share his delusions; and the other is doing it because of what? Penile cancer? The spread of STDs? Right, a baby with penile cancer and STDs (barring those who've had their willies sucked by herpes infected mohels, of course). No, for MONEY!!! That's right, the Almighty Dollar, that great American symbol of infallibility. Personally, whether they do it for profit or for the prophet, I think it is equally sick.

Now, I always find a nice cup of tea helps, especially when one is feeling a little hyper or out of sorts. And please, don't confuse a friendly little peck on the cheek with a hug. There's a big difference, and there is nothing ritualistic about it.
Hope you feel better soon.

Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #67)

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
71. Oh dear, what a horrible thing to say.
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 09:50 PM
Apr 2013

I'm sure there are places where you might fit in better, or you could just put everyone on ignore and respond to your own posts.
Anyway, I send you the best of wishes and hope you manage to feel better. Seriously, tea is a wonderful tonic.

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
72. I fit in pretty well here.
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 11:12 PM
Apr 2013

Been here since 2001, never banned, read pretty much every day unless something more pressing is occuring, like school or life.

And I have never used ignore, never will, although it's so tempting when I read the apologetic and white-washing regarding these poor infants and their lifetime herpes infection.

But it's just a ritual, right, so it's okay according to you. Much worse that they get it done in a hospital because it's done there for MONEY...not religion

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
73. Two wrongs don't make a right
Tue Apr 9, 2013, 11:41 AM
Apr 2013

I whitewash nothing. If anything, you whitewash the practice of hospital/business sanctioned sexual mutiation of children, because their parents request them. Did you ever stop to think why those parents request doctors to mutilate their babies?
Congratulations on your longevity here at DU. May the rest of your time here be even more enjoyable. Try not to take things too personally. You are obviously a good person, but not everyone is going to agree with your take on everything. That's why it's called a discussion board.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
44. It's forcing them on the baby.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:27 PM
Apr 2013

And it's forcing STDs and worse health risks on the baby - what if the kid gets a staph infection? MRSA? That baby could die!

I absolutely agree with an absolute requirement for circumcisions to be performed in a licensed medical facility, by a licensed doctor, with sterile instruments, and using modern medical technology. There's no excuse not to. If the mohel wants to participate, he can scrub up, don the mask, gown and gloves, and say his magic words while the doctor does the actual cutting.

There is no valid reason, zero, for allowing this kind of procedure to involve contact with the mohel's mouth! That's disgusting and dangerous.

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
46. But but but! It's done for religion
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:28 PM
Apr 2013

so therefore it's okay. And the herpes-laden mouths of mohels are known for their sterility, unlike hospital settings which are just...ick.

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
49. BUT ITS A RITUAL
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:31 PM
Apr 2013

!!!11!!11!!

I wonder....is giving babies herpes part of that ritual? Or is that just a 'freebie' given out of the kidness of the mohel's hearts, er, lips?

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
56. You are 100% correct and I never suggested otherwise.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:55 PM
Apr 2013

The practice of the routine circumcision of infants is disgusting and barbaric, regardless of who performs it. I merely commented on the barbaric practice of performing routine circumcisions on babies, regardless of their parents religious affiliation, in hospitals. TMK, the US is the only country that engages in such brutality against the most vulnerable members of society.

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
48. Also, I'm curious
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:30 PM
Apr 2013

Is the transmitting herpes to infants part of the ritual, too?

And these mohels do this for free, right? They're not "padding their pockets by mutilating babies"? Except they are. Not only are they mutilating children via circumcision, but also by giving them a lifetime infection of herpes. How kind of those religious folks.

Glad to see that giving babies herpes gets your seal of approval because it's a 'ritual'

sick. sick. sick.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
58. I don't know where you get the twisted idea that I support circumcision in any way.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 08:03 PM
Apr 2013

Child mutilation is evil, regardless of who performs it. The mohel's excuse is "God told me to do it". As sick as that is, it leaves little room for discussion. Now, what's the doctor's excuse apart from padding their pockets? Think about it. This isn't a contest about which is the greater evil. They are both evil. The one who commits evil because he thinks it's God's will, is beyond help. The one who does it purely for money should be indicted.

Heddi

(18,312 posts)
69. the mohels are doing it for god AND money
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 08:40 PM
Apr 2013

They're not doing this for free, yanno. There's a charge involved. Does that make it double bad?

And doctors perform circumcision for many reasons. Like most people, I'm sure you know someone or are related to someone, or are friends with someone or just have a good relationship with someone who is a medical doctor (even if it's your own GP) who would be happy to tell you why MD's perform circumcisions: because the parent(s) want it to be done. Just like why the mohels do it: because the parents want it done.

MD's and mohels are both doing it for two reasons: 1) parents want it done 2) someone will pay for it to be done. Mohels add 3) because god hates foreskins. So Mohels seem to do it for one more preposterous reason than MD's do.

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
70. And why do the parents want their children to be mutilated by doctors, pray tell?
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 09:34 PM
Apr 2013

I know many doctors, but none, TMK, who support the routine circumcision of infants. Who sold these parents on such bullshit?

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)
55. So messed up. Those babies now have incurable STDs.
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 07:50 PM
Apr 2013

They'll likely get breakouts on their penises from time to time for rest of their lives.

What is the defense for this? Does religious freedom really include giving infants incurable diseases?

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
59. Denouncing City’s Move to Regulate Circumcision
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 08:14 PM
Apr 2013

By SHARON OTTERMAN
Published: September 12, 2012

... The city estimates that metzitzah b’peh is used in some 3,600 local circumcisions each year. The city’s health department says that, between 2000 and 2011, 11 babies contracted herpes as a result, and 2 of them died. This spring, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared that the procedure created a risk for transmission of herpes and other pathogens and was “not safe” ...

Rabbi Gerald C. Skolnik, the president of the Rabbinical Assembly, the international association of conservative rabbis, said he supported the Board of Health’s move to require parental consent. He said that direct suction was not required by Jewish law and that the serious risks of the practice were “inconsistent with the Jewish tradition’s pre-eminent concern with human life and health.”

In 2005, the Rabbinical Council of America, the main union of modern Orthodox rabbis, urged that a sterile glass tube be used for suction, rather than the mohel’s mouth. But the group opposes the city’s effort to regulate the practice; instead it has asked the city to work with Orthodox groups “to voluntarily develop procedures to effectively prevent the unintended spread of infection” ...


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/nyregion/regulation-of-circumcision-method-divides-some-jews-in-new-york.html

struggle4progress

(118,280 posts)
60. Medical Associations Urge Against Injunction On Metzitzah Informed Consent
Sun Apr 7, 2013, 08:18 PM
Apr 2013

Evidence that oral suction ritual transmits disease is 'incontrovertible,' organizations state.
12/03/12
Hella Winston
Special To The Jewish Week

Three noted professional medical associations have submitted an amicus letter to the court opposing a motion for a preliminary injunction against the enactment of the New York City’s new rule requiring informed consent for metzitzah b’peh, the controversial oral suction circumcision ritual ...

The amicus letter was submitted to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald by the law firm of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher on behalf the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Society. It begins by noting that these organizations are “gravely concerned about the public health implications of an injunction against the implementation of the challenged parental consent regulation, and from a ruling that the regulation is unconstitutional.”

Drawing on medical data from as long ago as 1811 and as recently as this year, the letter goes on to assert that — contrary to the plaintiffs’ claims — there is “incontrovertible” evidence that the Herpes virus and other infectious diseases “have been transmitted through direct oral suction and direction oral suction increases the risks of transmission.”

Countering the plaintiffs’ contention that the consent requirement acts as “a vehicle to unconstitutionally compel” the speech of ritual circumcisers, the groups argue that “informed parental decision-making, including the disclosure of risks to the parents, serves a vital public health function and is a Constitutionally-protected parental right” ...


http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/new-york-news/medical-associations-urge-against-injunction-metzitzah-informed-consent

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
75. This needs to be just flat out banned
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 11:31 AM
Apr 2013

Any mohel who does this goes to jail and any parents that consent to it get a visit from CPS.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Religious circumcision ri...